* Martin Schlander <martin.schlander@gmail.com> [2010-06-29 13:44]:
Tirsdag den 29. juni 2010 13:12:30 skrev Guido Berhoerster:
I find this one exemplary for the arbitraryness of the whole strategy debate which seems to be centered around the notion that having a new stratgey is an end in itself while completely disregarding the existing community structure and the needs and preferences of users and contributors. Of course you can adopt a strategy in a top-down fashion, but who is going to sustain it at the end, Novell employees?
That's going a bit far I think. The strategy proposals are discussed openly and build upon an analysis of existing strenghts, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (swot) after all. So it's not really a top-down thing, and it's not completely disregarding existing reality either.
Yes, that is published and IIRC there was also an user survey, so there is some data (whatever its quality is) on current strengths, weaknesses and the userbase as well.
But I do agree that all the proposals are going from one extreme to the other. From basically having no explicit strategy/direction/mission whatsoever, to having an extremely narrow focus. And that is also going way too far :-)
Yes, they were about picking one arbitray, narrow focus from the list, explicitly at the expense of others. It treats the different objectives as mutually exclusive when they are not and neglects the fact that voluntary contributors cannot be shuffled around the project at will but have very diverse motivations and objectives which might clash with such a narrow strategy. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org